"More books like this one introducing historical study in a
sympathetic was are needed.."

Now in paperback

... and into its 3rd
reprint!

The ‘Inherent Military Probability’ hypothesis

Alfred Burne, a military
historian and specialist in medieval warfare, formalised the concept of Inherent
Military Probability (IMP). He proposed that where there is doubt or uncertainty
about some military actions, the probable action taken was the one that a
modern, trained military-mind would take.

The hypothesis implies that ancient
leaders were well-trained, intelligent, and thoughtful warriors. The key
criticism of IMP is that modern military thinking and doctrine might not be the
same as for medieval generals. But one might reasonably counter this by saying
that the military mind, with its focus on avoiding death and defeat, has not
fundamentally changed over the centuries. The use of the ground, understanding
obstacles and exploiting the weapons and resources available has also not
changed. Modern soldiers study past battles because there are lessons to be
learnt. Another criticism leveled at IMP is that it cannot be used to find a
battlefield.

The hypothesis can only test sites and make suggestions about courses of
action that are more or less likely, given the terrain.

However, selecting and
testing various sites would provide a workable way to check sites and could be
employed to guide researchers to investigate possible sites. Fulford has
provided a way to blind-test the IMP hypothesis. My work with the Territorial
Army required me to entertain visiting senior, military officers who often
arrived at weekends and it would fall to me to entertain them. A contemplation
of York’s many local battlefields certainly provided entertainment. Fulford
was especially convenient as the Officer’s Mess is located a short walk from
Germany Beck and there are a number of pubs conveniently sited for the
contemplate of this problem.

It gradually became clear that the military minds
unanimously favoured Germany Beck as a sensible fit for the limited literature
and a defensible ‘choke point’. A modern soldier would not employ a shieldwall
but would site their defences along the beck to provide interlocking and
overlapping support with their weapons. By contrast, the Fulford Ings, was the
popular choice among non-military commentators (and I confess that I used to
favour this as a possible place for the battle) was always brusquely dismissed
by the modern military mind as being utterly indefensible. In my defence, I
should point out that nearly all these visits predated any formal investigation
of the battle.

I suggest that this was in fact a ‘double blind trial’ of the IMP
hypothesis since there was no archaeology available at the time, nor did the
military men have any pre-knowledge of the battle. We tested several sites
against the descriptions of the battle. Because I was not even aware of the IMP
hypothesis myself, this can claim to be a double blind trial. Between 1995 and
2000 the trained military minds all selected Germany Beck.

The investigative
work which began after 2000 provides physical evidence that the battle took
place along the beck. This provides one successful test of Burne’s hypothesis.
The following sections extend this hypothesis by examining several aspects of
the battle to see if the location proposed is reasonable. As noted earlier, this
will not prove that the battle took place in this location but it will show that
the location is feasible and matches the available data.